A 19 year old woman from Tunisia that is a member of the FEMEN feminist organization uploaded a topless picture of herself on Facebook,with the message "Fuck your morals" written on her body,and the photo description "My body belongs to me".

Her action didn't go unnoticed and generated an outcry in her country,with local religious leader Adel Almi proclaiming that "she deserves to be stoned".This photo was her latest post in Facebook and she haven't used it since,and people who call her mobile phone say that it's being turned off. Nobody knows what is happening to her as she disappeared without leaving any traces.Soon after FEMEN Tunisia's Facebook page got hacked by people proclaiming they will fight to "wipe off the dirt" from Tunisia.

This is why we need wide scale western support for intervention in the region. "I am a woman and free" is an amazing sentiment but,"I am a Woman and free and that Australian Bastard will shoot you down if you touch me"is both amazing and safer for these amazing and courageous human beings.

EDIT: I also find it funny that a site that hosts what I honestly hope that it hopes will be honestly mature and informed discussions on politics and religion follows roughly the same policy re: the female body and politics as the Dar as Islam (As shown by the block out of the breasts of the protester in question.) . No blame attaches to the Moderators or the OP. I agree that this is the moderators house and they are the big man around here (the internet follows Melanesian norms in that respect) but personally, and without any enmity towards those who write the rules and a full appreciation of the conflicts that they must reconcile to keep this sub forum from descending into a hurricane of racial epithets, but I honestly believe that if someone considers that they are mature enough to put forward a point of view about the future of humanity then they are mature enough to see breasts in a philosophical context.

Seriously, if a woman is being courageous enough to stand up to the Ulamas and Imams, we, as a site should be brave enough to show what she is saying as she intended to say it.

Again, I see where the OP is coming from and the moderators for enforcing similar ideals in the past, but I respectfully disagree and believe that such well intentioned ideals are ultimately harmful and should be overcome if the R/P forum is to be more than a token effort.If anyone is offended by my notions, please contact me directly, so that I may clarify my potion and listen to yours as knowledge is the key to all disputes.

In the news article I linked it has the original photo. I used the censored one on the forum because I wouldn't like to upset mods and get a warning. If mods don't have a problem,I can replace the censored one with an uncensored one.

While I don't necessarily smoke wit tha punishments some have called for, I straight-up struggle ta feel sympathy.

Modern Feminizzle is one of dem thangs dat was once necessary but ain't anymore. Most of dem is wackly ignorant n' desperate ta be a part of somethang yo, but I guess dat can be holla'd fo' most thangs dat lack all foundation n' is outrageously absurd ta mah playas dat don't participate up in holla'd absurdity.

Stavros Dimou:In the news article I linked it has the original photo. I used the censored one on the forum because I wouldn't like to upset mods and get a warning. If mods don't have a problem,I can replace the censored one with an uncensored one.

Shadowstar38:...Um. What are you on about? It's kind of against the rules to show tits here regardless of context....

And since that kind of puritanical social control is what she's protesting, it's rather disrespectful to post her protest here: in censored form, so it's in accordance with what it was supposed to be a rebellion against.

So either it should be posted uncensored, or it shouldn't be posted at all. No need to (unintentionally, I'm sure) rub it in the poor woman's face that she's disappeared for nothing.

And since that kind of puritanical social control is what she's protesting, it's rather disrespectful to post her protest here: in censored form, so it's in accordance with what it was supposed to be a rebellion against.

So either it should be posted uncensored, or it shouldn't be posted at all. No need to (unintentionally, I'm sure) rub it in the poor woman's face that she's disappeared for nothing.

*facepalm*

You know what? If you'd like to take a stand and post the uncensored version than go ahead. No one is stopping you.

These are the types of things that makes one wonder if sovereignty is such a great idea. If a societies morals are so plain wrong that they will grossly violate the freedom of dissenters and minorities then perhaps such a society does not deserve to rule itself or even decide its own destiny.

Atrocious Joystick:These are the types of things that makes one wonder if sovereignty is such a great idea. If a societies morals are so plain wrong that they will grossly violate the freedom of dissenters and minorities then perhaps such a society does not deserve to rule itself or even decide its own destiny.

Stavros Dimou:In the news article I linked it has the original photo. I used the censored one on the forum because I wouldn't like to upset mods and get a warning. If mods don't have a problem,I can replace the censored one with an uncensored one.

Shadowstar38:...Um. What are you on about? It's kind of against the rules to show tits here regardless of context....

And since that kind of puritanical social control is what she's protesting, it's rather disrespectful to post her protest here: in censored form, so it's in accordance with what it was supposed to be a rebellion against.

So either it should be posted uncensored, or it shouldn't be posted at all. No need to (unintentionally, I'm sure) rub it in the poor woman's face that she's disappeared for nothing.

Much as I dislike things you have posted here (this forum) previously, I have to agree with you as I stated above.People who cannot differentiate between a political statement and sexual titillation should perhaps not be putting forward options on the fate of the amazing species that is Homo Sapiens, whether it be in an important capacity or the R/P section of a video game forum.

Again, with regards to the moderators, I see that public pressure to conform to these standards forces you to enforce standards as society sees and them so as to avoid controversy (as as aside, everything is easier to spell if you pronounce it in the Commonwealth/British fashion). My complaints are more towards the standards that this site and the way it is led to enforce them than this site the manner it follows societal norms, I fully understand and am not attempting to have one up on the staff for holding a position I oppose.

Stavros Dimou:In the news article I linked it has the original photo. I used the censored one on the forum because I wouldn't like to upset mods and get a warning. If mods don't have a problem,I can replace the censored one with an uncensored one.

Shadowstar38:...Um. What are you on about? It's kind of against the rules to show tits here regardless of context....

And since that kind of puritanical social control is what she's protesting, it's rather disrespectful to post her protest here: in censored form, so it's in accordance with what it was supposed to be a rebellion against.

So either it should be posted uncensored, or it shouldn't be posted at all.

Before writing this thread I've made a small research on FEMEN and they said that they show of their breasts in protests as a means to gather more attention so they can spread their message further. This story would have got my own attention with or without breasts,so I thought that showing the breasts or hiding them would be irrelevant to the point of this thread. I hope fellow readers on the Escapist will find the news story serious enough and pay attention to it,no matter if there is a picture with a girl's breasts on the thread or not.

the clockmaker:(as as aside, everything is easier to spell if you pronounce it in the Commonwealth/British fashion)

"Lieutenant"? "Honour"?

That said, yes, I will agree with the notion that zero tolerance policies like these make no sense. Posting her uncensored political statement should be allowed on here. I just can't fault the OP for not doing it because of the consequences. It's The Escapist that'd need to include such exceptions to their policy.

Also, I fear this will end up being yet another thread derailed into press speech regulations or something, when this woman's life may be on the line/already have ended. I find the actual topic more important and more interesting than this side-discussion.

Atrocious Joystick:These are the types of things that makes one wonder if sovereignty is such a great idea. If a societies morals are so plain wrong that they will grossly violate the freedom of dissenters and minorities then perhaps such a society does not deserve to rule itself or even decide its own destiny.

I assume you're from the West, right?

See this is the constant semi-self aware notion that prevails in the west that offends me. Almost an idea that due to the spectre of sins that occurred in the past we should have no voice. You know what was the common sentiment in Africa and SE Asia that people took to me?'Why does Australia do nothing?' Now I recognise the right of sovereignty that these nations possess. But you need to recognise that these nations have the right to self determination, but you need to recognise that the governments and powerful groupings in these and other nations are abusing human rights to a degree that comment from less offending nations is necessary. Now Tunisia does deserve to be a sovereign nation, as do all nations, but in this respect, and in others, they are fucking up, and people from nations that aren't fucking up to that degree deserve to stand up and say, 'oi,

Australian army swearing from herePHA+b2kgY3VudCwgdGhhdCBzaGl0IGlzIGZ1Y2tlZCB1cCwgYmFjayB0aGUgZnVjayBvZmYgYmVmb3JlIHdlIGhhdmUgdG8gc3RlcCBpbjwvcD4=

Why in the name of Christ or whoever the fuck can't you just say that or 'Hey mate, they are allowed self determination but are fucking up here.' as opposed to a mildly arrogant post as yours was. Arabs have the right to critique western culture, so to Pashtus and Persians and Malays and Melanesians and peoplple from the PRC or ROC, but Westerners have the right to critique other cultures as well and 'you are western' should not serve to shut down conversation as you seem to desire.

the clockmaker:(as as aside, everything is easier to spell if you pronounce it in the Commonwealth/British fashion)

"Lieutenant"? "Honour"?

I once got in the shit because I, on the way to lunch, saluted a yank lieutenant and said 'good morning leftenant' and he thought I was taking the piss. My corporal made me write a paper on cultural awareness. 21 century hooray!

Atrocious Joystick:These are the types of things that makes one wonder if sovereignty is such a great idea. If a societies morals are so plain wrong that they will grossly violate the freedom of dissenters and minorities then perhaps such a society does not deserve to rule itself or even decide its own destiny.

Whether or not I think that previous actions of Western countries preclude moral superiority is irrelevant. (Although it does raise a separate discussion of whether or not there is some kind of "One true path" of morality along which Western nations are further progressed.)

I was going to say that it's all very well questioning sovereignty when your collective military (Nato) is both larger and better funded than many entire countries.

No-one is about to intervene in the West because they think certain Western cultural or moral practices are "Fucked up", because they'd get stomped.

Intervention is not a threat to the West, so calling for a reduction in national sovereignty seems rather... well... hypocritical I suppose.

Whether or not I think that previous actions of Western countries preclude moral superiority is irrelevant. (Although it does raise a separate discussion of whether or not there is some kind of "One true path" of morality along which Western mations are further progressed.)

Do you agree with her actions Y/N

beyond that, if you want to argue Western Morals, you can create a thread to do so. See mate this is why I caveat and qualify my posts, any shit that you don't say has to be assumed by the 'side' that you choose. It is unfair, but that is the way that it has to be when I have so little of you to go on. This is a function of how forums work, and you really should move forward based on that assumption.

I was going to say

But mate, no fucker interrupted you and you didn't say that, so in a non time limited environment, it is difficult for me to use that as a point in your favour.

that it's all very well questioning sovereignty when your collective military (Nato) is both larger and better funded than many entire countries.

No-one is about to intervene in the West because they think certain Western cultural or moral practices are "Fucked up" because they'd get stomped.

But mate, due to the cultural differences in respect towards the moral imperative of the UN, this is kind of irrelevant to the post that I quoted you in. In terms of Cultural effect, a full UN embargo would have as much 'moral' impact on say... the US or AUS as a military Intervention would on a state such as Tunisia. This is due to the different notions of what comprises an 'international community' and what comprises a moral sanction. To give a useful comparison, Say your best friend calls you a fuckhead... that has about that same impact as me, a stranger, punching you in the face.

Intervention is not a threat to the West, so calling for a reduction in national sovereignty seems rather... well... hypocritical I suppose.

And I allowed for this in my first quote of you. I do not think that Tunisia is at the top of the list of nations that the west needs to intervene in. you could have said 'this shit is wrong, but does not quite merit military intervention.' and I would have walked on by (probably into a wall because I'm kinda drunk). But you did not, you simply cast the aspiration that the person you quoted was western and thus (I inferred of your position, fairly in my opinion) therefore not qualified to discuss the topic at hand.

Overall thoughts,When I talk about Papua, I do not try and exclude Indonesians,When I discuss Afghanistan, I do not exclude Pakistanis,When I debate the Asylum seeker issue, I do not dismiss Iraqis, Tamils or Pashtus.

You need to do the same, if you feel that westerners do not have a valid point to make about female rights in the ME, discuss why, if you feel that they are too ill informed to speak (and brother, I've been there on other issues here) don't say shit, just move on.

But if you post what you posted, a non-inclusive, mildly arrogant and non-constructive point .Expect me to react to what you posted, not what you, in your own self, intended. This is not an environment for what you meant deep with in your self, this is an environment for what you said. And what you said was what I responded to. Please keep this in mind in the future, and hey, it may be beneficial to spend more time condemning the system that forced the person in the OP to do this as opposed to the the people who oppose you via words.

Atrocious Joystick:These are the types of things that makes one wonder if sovereignty is such a great idea. If a societies morals are so plain wrong that they will grossly violate the freedom of dissenters and minorities then perhaps such a society does not deserve to rule itself or even decide its own destiny.

I assume you're from the West, right?

The north more like.

Agreed mate, I was born further east than almost all of the ME/CA, and I am annoyed at being at being called a 'westerner' I am a 'southerner' if I am anything.

or I call you mate because that is the polite thing to do if you don't know someone's name due to people getting offended at 'love' nowadays. The swearing and mannerisms are how I normally talk. Me and all my mates. I am kinda drunk though. I mean it is 'satdiy' after all.

beyond that, if you want to argue Western Morals, you can create a thread to do so. See mate this is why I caveat and qualify my posts, any shit that you don't say has to be assumed by the 'side' that you choose. It is unfair, but that is the way that it has to be when I have so little of you to go on. This is a function of how forums work, and you really should move forward based on that assumption.

Wuh. No it doesn't. I wasn't even talking to you. Atrocious Joystick read my question as what it was: a question. I really don't understand why you assumed it was some snark-fest. The correct response to perceived ambiguity when talking about things like this isn't to assume the worst, it's to either clarify, or apply the principal of charity.

I was going to say

But mate, no fucker interrupted you and you didn't say that, so in a non time limited environment, it is difficult for me to use that as a point in your favour.

Well, actually, yes I was interrupted. You interrupted me. Like I said, I wasn't talking to you.

But mate, due to the cultural differences in respect towards the moral imperative of the UN, this is kind of irrelevant to the post that I quoted you in. In terms of Cultural effect, a full UN embargo would have as much 'moral' impact on say... the US or AUS as a military Intervention would on a state such as Tunisia. This is due to the different notions of what comprises an 'international community' and what comprises a moral sanction. To give a useful comparison, Say your best friend calls you a fuckhead... that has about that same impact as me, a stranger, punching you in the face.

So you're saying that there is still a threat to Western national sovereignty in the form of UN trade sanctions?

But you did not, you simply cast the aspiration that the person you quoted was western and thus (I inferred of your position, fairly in my opinion) therefore not qualified to discuss the topic at hand.

No, not fairly. Why would I exclude Westerners from the discussion when I'm from the UK? That wouldn't make any sense.

You need to do the same, if you feel that westerners do not have a valid point to make about female rights in the ME, discuss why, if you feel that they are too ill informed to speak (and brother, I've been there on other issues here) don't say shit, just move on.

Wuh. I'm not talking about female rights (nor was I going to, which is why I said it was irrelevant). I was going to challenge his call for a lessening of sovereignty. Which I did to you, and although I didn't quote him I think he saw it.

But if you post what you posted, a non-inclusive, mildly arrogant and non-constructive point .Expect me to react to what you posted, not what you, in your own self, intended. This is not an environment for what you meant deep with in your self, this is an environment for what you said. And what you said was what I responded to. Please keep this in mind in the future, and hey, it may be beneficial to spend more time condemning the system that forced the person in the OP to do this as opposed to the the people who oppose you via words.

I just asked a question.

I didn't want to assume he was from a NATO member-state, even though that's a reasonable assumption to make given how he's speaking English apparently fluently on the internet at this time of day, so I just asked to double-check, because, if he wasn't, my point wouldn't have made any sense.

Modern Feminizzle is one of dem thangs dat was once necessary but ain't anymore. Most of dem is wackly ignorant n' desperate ta be a part of somethang yo, but I guess dat can be holla'd fo' most thangs dat lack all foundation n' is outrageously absurd ta mah playas dat don't participate up in holla'd absurdity.

Right, except that woman don't actually have the same legal rights as men in Tunisia. They're a lot better than most countries in the region but they're still not there yet. Ignoring the debatable claim (as in, it could be argued non stop for weeks and if you don't believe me look at off-topic) that feminism has served its purpose in the west, it is still needed here.

If this protest happened in the Europe or America, conservatives would grumble, other people would encourage them, others would call it childish posturing and others would engage in trolling.

Instead, she got disappeared and people hacked the page to send violent rhetoric. That on its own tells you that feminism still has a lot of work to do there.

Danny Ocean:My response to this post was literally, "Wait, wut?" I have no idea where all this anger has come from.

Mate, I am not angry yet, this has not earned my anger.

Wuh. No it doesn't. I wasn't even talking to you. Atrocious Joystick read my question as what it was: a question. I really don't understand why you assumed it was some snark-fest. The correct response to perceived ambiguity when talking about things like this isn't to assume the worst, it's to either clarify, or apply the principal of charity.

Mate, you ask that sort of thing to confirm your assumptions based on the ethnic/geographic history of the person that you ask in order to slot them into more comfortable boxes. Christ I wish people would be more honest when they did this.

Well, actually, yes I was interrupted. You interrupted me. Like I said, I wasn't talking to you.

FOr me to interrupt you mate, I have to stop you talking, that is the beauty of posting, you can sit back, think about what you want to say and no bogan bastard (like me) can interrupt you before you say everything. TO show this, I am going to post the entire lyrics of 'the star of the county down.'

'Near Banbridge town, in the County DownOne morning in JulyDown a bóithrín green came a sweet cailínAnd she smiled as she passed me by.Oh she looked so sweet from her two bare feetTo the sheen of her nut brown hairSuch a coaxing elf, sure I shook myselfTo be sure I was really there.

Chorus:And from Bantry Bay up to Derry QuayAnd from Galway to Dublin townNo maid I've seen like the brown cailínThat I met in the County Down.

As she onward sped I shook my headAnd I gazed with a feeling rareAnd I said, says I, to a passerby"Who's the maid with the nut-brown hair?"He smiled at me, and with pride says he,"That's the gem of Ireland's crown.She's young Rosie McCann from the banks of the BannShe's the star of the County Down."

Chorus

I've travelled a bit, but never was hitSince my roving career beganBut fair and square I surrendered thereTo the charms of young Rose McCann.I'd a heart to let and no tenant yetDid I meet with in shawl or gownBut in she went and I asked no rentFrom the star of the County Down.

Chorus

At the crossroads fair I'll be surely thereAnd I'll dress in my Sunday clothesAnd I'll try sheep's eyes, and deludhering liesOn the heart of the nut-brown rose.No pipe I'll smoke, no horse I'll yokeThough with rust my plow turns brownTill a smiling bride by my own firesideSits the star of the County Down.'

Notice how nobody interrupted me? Maybe that is because due to the nature of a non-time limited forum it is fucking impossible for people to interrupt you. You said what you wanted to say, limited by your own opinion or your own laziness, not by me 'interrupting' you. Actually mate, please tell me how I stopped you from saying what you were going to say, I'm due for a good laugh.

And mate, this is a public forum. If you say something ridiculous to someone, it doesn't matter if you just said it to them, it is a public venue, your words are now public property.

No, not fairly. Why would I exclude Westerners from the discussion when I'm from the UK? That wouldn't make any sense.

The same way that many westerners feel the need to discard any western opinion regarding the ME. The fact that your position does not make sense is why I quoted you in the first place.

Wuh. I'm not talking about female rights (nor was I going to, which is why I said it was irrelevant). I was going to challenge his call for a lessening of sovereignty. Which I did to you, and although I didn't quote him I think he saw it.

look at the thread that you are in, It is not my my fault if you post self admitted irrelevant posts in threads. I work with what can be reasonably discerned. If you want to enter a thread about the actual oppression of 50% of the population of Tunisia and complain about the words that some random bloke is posting, expect to be drawn back into the real shit.

I just asked a question.

I didn't want to assume he was from a NATO member-state, even though that's a reasonable assumption to make given how he's speaking English apparently fluently on the internet at this time of day, so I just asked to double-check, because, if he wasn't, my point wouldn't have made any sense.

See though mate, I have this thing called a rudimentary thought process, and that leads me to believe that you wished to use the fact that the person that you quoted in the original post was western as a point in your favour. Previous experience in similar discussions informs me that you wish to use his/her origin to 'shut them down' regarding this discussion. I do apologia for the differing nature of different natures of this post. I posted before I could read over it and so I had to edit it.

Ah, that would explain the repeated use of the word "mate". Rarely hear anyone sober say that, though it might just be me.

Clearly you don't hang around with many AJs then mate

Not many, no. Last time I saw "mate" used so many times was when Howard was talking about his preamble.

I Assume that you are talking about little Johnny, and I must remind you that while most soldiers voted for him, he was not an AJ himself, did not speak the lingo and did not wear the kit. AJs mostly talk like I do here, but with more hostility. I only tone it down because mose AJs would be banned w/in 24 hours.

Atrocious Joystick:These are the types of things that makes one wonder if sovereignty is such a great idea. If a societies morals are so plain wrong that they will grossly violate the freedom of dissenters and minorities then perhaps such a society does not deserve to rule itself or even decide its own destiny.

Um. What are you on about? It's kind of against the rules to show tits here regardless of context.

OT: We should just invade this place. Fuck it.[/quoteAre you willing to fight there and risk your life? Or are you willing to let other people go out and fight for the rights of those they never met or cared about, risking their lives in the process?

Are you willing to fight there and risk your life? Or are you willing to let other people go out and fight for the rights of those they never met or cared about, risking their lives in the process?

Holy shit! Iron! You escaped! Glad to have you back.

Back to point, I'm not in the U.S. military because, you know, where I go would be based on what other people decide is a just cause. Personally, I wouldn't mind risking my own life if it meant preventing stuff like this from happening.

Are you willing to fight there and risk your life? Or are you willing to let other people go out and fight for the rights of those they never met or cared about, risking their lives in the process?

Holy shit! Iron! You escaped! Glad to have you back.

Back to point, I'm not in the U.S. military because, you know, where I go would be based on what other people decide is a just cause. Personally, I wouldn't mind risking my own life if it meant preventing stuff like this from happening.

.I'm still there, I just got some vacation time. It's Passover.

I seriously doubt you know what 'risking my own life' entails. This isn't a computer game. Interventions in favor of a people, not a government rarely leaves the drawing board of some mad and brave humanitarian. If you know your politics you could realize on your own what I meant.

Hopefully the girl is hiding from her pursuers and not already caught and... dealt with.

Atrocious Joystick:These are the types of things that makes one wonder if sovereignty is such a great idea. If a societies morals are so plain wrong that they will grossly violate the freedom of dissenters and minorities then perhaps such a society does not deserve to rule itself or even decide its own destiny.

I assume you're from the West, right?

Imperialism, Colonialism & White Man's Burden Ho!

No, see, this is what the other guy was getting at I think.

It's not about Imperialism, Colonialism, or whatever.

It's about the current political reality.

I mean this is getting annoying Dx. I feel like the South Park kids from this episode:

There is no justification for allowing the rules to be broken regarding the picture because some groups are sympathetic to her ill thought actions.I'm sure you're all well aware of the censorship and harassment of dissenters in your own countries, perhaps you even support it because it's in your interests so I find this all very hypocritical.